Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Prosecutor to Gosnell: 'Are you human?'

PHILADELPHIA, April 30, 2013 (Operation Rescue)
- With lead prosecutor Joanne Pescatore wiping away tears, Assistant Ed
Cameron gave an impassioned plea for justice in the final moments of
his closing arguments in the Kermit Gosnell murder trial that left an
impression on the gallery and most likely the jury.
Cameron had the last word for the jurors on Monday as he began by
meticulously summarizing the testimony of the 54 witnesses who took the
stand during this capital murder case. Gosnell faces four counts of
first degree murder for severing the spinal cords of babies born alive
during illegal late-term abortions performed amidst squalid conditions
by grossly unqualified staff.

“Viability or survivability is irrelevant,” Cameron told the jury,
explaining that whether the babies were born alive is the standard the
law asks them to consider.
“Outside the mother, all things change. It is a human being and has to
be treated as such,” Cameron continued, noting that to accelerate the
death process was to commit murder.
While some of the testimony summaries given by Cameron seemed plodding
at times, each point was important to counter defense arguments that
every baby was dead when it “precipitated,” because Gosnell used Digoxin
in each and every case.

Cameron seemed upset and even angry as McMahon introduced testimony
during his own closing arguments that Cameron believed had not been
entered into evidence during the seven week trial, interrupting McMahon
and later asking for a sidebar.
But when his turn came, Cameron quickly countered McMahon’s assertions
that Gosnell used Digoxin to make sure the babies were dead prior to the
abortion, noting that when Crime Scene Unit Officer John Taggart
collected and cataloged all the drugs found inside Gosenell’s clinic,
there was no Digoxin in that inventory.

Cameron recounted testimony from expert witnesses who said there were
no puncture wounds in any of the babies nor was there any trace of
Digoxin in their systems. On the contrary, witnesses had said that
Gosnell tried using Digoxin for awhile but that it never worked. He even
tried increasing the dosages to as much as 400 times the recommended
amount, only to eventually give up. It was then when he began “snipping”
the necks of babies, according to testimony.
McMahon seemed to make a critical misstep when he explained that the
neck snipping was to alleviate any pain that the brain might detect,
indicating that these babies may have had brain function and the
sensations of pain.

Cameron gave an agonizing account of how the newborn babies must have
felt as they struggled to be born, finally entering the light only to be
stabbed by Gosnell and doomed to slowly suffocate to death.
McMahon and described how there had been an unprecedented “rush to
judgment” in this case, with no reporters writing about the presumption
of innocence.
“Never in my career have I seen the presumption of innocence so stomped
on,” McMahon said. He spoke of a “rush to judgment” and “knee-jerk
assumptions without evidence.”
But Cameron indicated that the only “rush to judgment” had been by
Gosnell, “who was more interested in making a buck than about the health
and safety of women.”
Cameron lambasted Eileen O’Neill for sharing culpability in the atrocities that took place at Gosnell’s clinic.
“She hid upstairs with her head in the sand. She’s not fit to be called a doctor,” he said.
Cameron related an incident when he once had a dog that got sick and
had to be put down. The dog was given two injections; the first to put
it to sleep and the second to kill it.
“My dog was treated better than he treated women and children,” Cameron said.
He described Gosnell’s “Henry Ford Model” of medicine, which consisted
of an assembly line that allowed Gosnell to make vast amounts of money
while cutting back on expenses. Such reductions included the reuse of
one-dollar disposable curettes, a practice that endangered the health of
women and spread sexually transmitted diseases among his patients.

At one point, for emphasis, Cameron donned purple latex gloves and held
up the filthy brownish-yellow curettes that were slightly warped from
reuse. He then held up once more the filthy vaginal probe and waved it
for all to see. Cameron gestured toward the dirty, outdated suction
machine and asked how anyone could possibly read the pressure gauge
since the glass cover was caked in dried blood.

Cameron dramatically turned to Gosnell and asked him, “Are you human?”
He then turned to the jury while pointing to Gosnell and said, “He’s
the one in this case that doesn’t deserve to be called human.”

The Assistant District Attorney spoke with passion and emotion as he
described how Gosnell “doesn’t even have the basic humanity” to treat
the remains of his victims properly. “We know what happened to them,” he
said, then recounted how the remains were placed in lime-aid containers
and cat food cans, ground in a garbage disposal, or flushed down the
toilet until the plumbing clogged.
He reminded them of the testimony of Jimmy Johnson, who described how
he opened up a clean-out drain and out poured recognizable fetal
remains, such as arms and other body parts.
Of Karnamaya Mongar, Cameron concluded that she epitomized the American
dream, coming to America seeking a better life after 20 hard years in a
refugee camp in Nepal. But when Gosnell heard Mongar’s respiration had
slowed prior to the procedure, he responded by giving her more drugs.
After being told half way through the abortion that Mongar had turned
gray, Gosnell continued the abortion for 20 more minutes. A drug that
could have counteracted the fatal overdose was expired in the cabinet
and went unused.

Mongar went to Gosnell, Cameron said, and “laid on that rusty table and
he killed her…She should be alive and those babies should be alive,” he
said.
McMahon talked in his closing arguments about a firestorm created by
this case, characterizing it as a political tsunami that was racist and
elitist in nature, threatening to swallow up all those involved. McMahon
told the jury that District Attorney Seth Williams had “a big press
conference, and things got out of control from there.”

At one point McMahon described how the witnesses pled guilty out of
fear and even told the jury that Sherry West was framed for murder in
the death of Karnamaya Mongar.
But Cameron again turned McMahon’s words on him, telling the jury that
there was indeed a firestorm, but it was the one described by Steven
Massof, an unlicensed abortionist who worked for Gosnell, when he
testified, “I felt like a fireman in Hell.”
“That Hell was 3801 Lancaster and Gosnell was the captain of that
Hell,” said Cameron. “It was raining fetuses,” he proclaimed, referring
again to Massof’s testimony. “It’s time to extinguish that fire, that
Hell he created.”
“Those babies didn’t have a chance,” he continued. “They couldn’t say, ‘Let me live,’ except for one baby that whined.”

If convicted on even one count of first degree murder, Gosnell could
face the death penalty. He faces hundreds of lesser counts, including 24
charges related to illegal abortions beyond 24 weeks, and well over 200
counts of violating informed consent laws and failure to abide by a
24-hour waiting period.
O’Neill’s attorney asked earlier in the day for acquittal of her
charges of “theft by deception” because, he noted, that her patients
“got what they paid for.” He attempted to portray his client as a good
doctor, even though she was unlicensed. He attempted to argue that
O’Neill had not ducked out a side door out of fear of being caught doing
something wrong, as she had told FBI agents who interviewed her and
disputed the notion that she ever told authorities that 70 percent of
what she did was done without Gosnell being present.

Conditions at the clinic were discussed, with McMahon showing select
photos of the building that appeared to be relatively clean. However,
Cameron pointed out that those photos had been taken only after the
facility was cleaned and painted after the death of Mongar, and then
again after the raid by the FBI and DEA.

Cameron indicated that Kareema Cross’ photos depicted something far more repulsive.
However, the most convincing evidence about the squalid conditions at
Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” was the equipment and furnishings that had
been seized from the clinic and brought into the courtroom for the jury
to see day after day.

After the proceedings concluded for the day, I was given the
opportunity to enter the front of the court room and inspect that
evidence for myself. Photos of the abortion table and objects simply do
not relate the full extent of the aged equipment and the filth that
encrusted it.
Judge Jeffery P. Minehart, who has presided over the trial, was
scheduled to give jury instructions on Tuesday morning then the case
will be in the hands of the jury. Whether they can find guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt remains to be seen.This article originally appeared onOperation Rescueand is reprinted with permission

NEW YORK, April 29, 2013 (JillStanek.com) -Last week American Life League tried to run a full page ad in the New York Timesand Washington Postthat showed images from actual Planned Parenthood sex education materials for kids as young as 10 years old.
Both newspapers rejected the ad as “too graphic” and “shocking” for
their adult readers to see. But the images are okay for kids in the
classroom to see – at taxpayer expense.
I have ALL’s ad posted on page 2. WARNING: It’s too vulgar to run on page 1.
The backstory from ALL:

To raise public awareness about Planned Parenthood’s controversial sex
education – more accurately described as sexual indoctrination – ALL
planned a series of advertisements revealing what and how children are
really taught in PP’S so-called “comprehensive sex education.” These are
programs that are already in many schools and will reach all public
schools as currently mandated in Obamacare.
The Washington Post rejected the
advertisement simply saying that, without disguising the pictures, it
was “too graphic.” The only images in the ad are from Planned
Parenthood-endorsed sources. If they are too graphic for adults reading
the Washington Post, then they certainly should not be in elementary school classrooms.
Likewise, the New York Times offered to run
the ad only if ALL would agree to blur the pictures. Its staff suggested
that they could run a disclaimer saying, “Image too shocking for the New York Times audience. To see actual image and for more information, please visit:http://www.all.org/pdf/PP_HookingKids.pdf.”
ALL is asking concerned citizens to demand that all federal funding for Planned Parenthood be cut. Visit StopPlannedParenthood.com for more information.
“Planned Parenthood is not in the healthcare business, it is in the
sex industry,” added Brown. “More than half of its $1 billion budget
comes from tax dollars, and the organization stands to gain another
billion dollars through Obamacare. It must end.”

Live Action President Lila Rose Responds to Marjana Banzil, director of the Bronx abortion center

Live Action released a video on Sunday proving that Kermit
Gosnell, with his “House of Horrors,” is not alone. Taking place at the
Dr. Emily Woman’s Health Center in the Bronx, New York, this is the
first in a series of undercover videos documenting the brutality,
inhumanity, and lawlessness of the late-term abortion industry.
From the press release:

“The reaction of Marjana Banzil, director of Dr. Emily
Women’s Health Center the late term abortion center in the Bronx,
demonstrates the danger to women and children that exists in such
centers due to a lack of medical knowledge. It is difficult to believe
that the Bronx clinic worker who has been on staff for more than a
decade is ‘misinformed’ when claiming they would put born-alive baby in
jar of toxic solution to ensure death or when she suggests flushing baby
if delivered at home during procedure. If this was a ‘misinformed’
employee as Ms Banzil claims, she owes the public an explanation on what
measures she will take to rectify the situation. We call on New York
state and city government and health officials to investigate this
late-term abortion center in the Bronx and others in New York.”

Live Action President Lila Rose Responds to Dr. Santangelo, DC late term abortion provider

Live Action released the second video in its Inhuman undercover
video investigation on Monday proving that Kermit Gosnell, with his
“House of Horrors,” is not alone. Taking place at the Washington
Surgi-Clinic in Washington, D.C., this is the second in a series of
undercover videos documenting the brutality, inhumanity, and lawlessness
of the late-term abortion industry.
From the press release:

“For Dr. Santangelo to call a 24 week pregnant woman a
terrorist, after having just admitted he would leave struggling babies
to die after surviving abortion, is a desperate attempt to distract from
his own horrific actions. The numbness Dr. Santangelo displays to his
victims is both heart-breaking and shocking. It is time to investigate
the inhuman and brutal practices that happen behind the closed doors of
these facilities across the country.”

Media Matters misrepresents Live Action video

Yesterday, April 28, the blog Media Matters published an article entitled “Live Action’s Latest Abortion Clinic Undercover Video A Bust”
The article attempts to disparage the footage that Live Action
released which showed a 23 week pregnant woman posing as a patient going
in for an abortion at Dr. Emily’s Woman’s Clinic The footage, which can
be seen here in it’s edited form and here in it’s unedited form, addresses the clinic’s policy of what happens if a baby is born alive.
The pregnant woman asks about what would happen if the baby were to
come out intact and alive. I will quote the transcript of the complete
footage with no editing so that the reader can see the context.

WOMAN: And then like, you know, if, if it didn’t work,
you know, what would they do? Like, do you know what I’m saying? Like if
it was there in one piece, if you’re this far along?
CLINIC-3: No, we never had that for ages, of being it would survive this, no.
WOMAN: You never have that? Really? Ok.
CLINIC-3: Mm.
WOMAN: So what would they do if that did happen, like?
CLINIC-3: They, well, it’s, if it did come out in one piece, it’s
very small. So they would still have to put it in like a jar, a
container, with solution, and send it to the lab.
WOMAN: Oh, oh okay so they would just be able to just pretty much–
CLINIC: Yeah all our specimen have to go out to the lab.
WOMAN: Okay.
CLINIC-3: Yeah. No matter what.
WOMAN: To just, that’s just–
CLINIC-3: They–
WOMAN: That’s just how you get rid, like, that’s just how you get rid of it?
CLINIC-3: Yeah they just, we don’t just throw it out in the garbage.
WOMAN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, no.
CLINIC-3: The lab disposes it.
WOMAN: Oh okay.
CLINIC-3: So wherever they dispose it to.
WOMAN: Like a waste or medical thing or whatever.
CLINIC-3: Yes.
WOMAN: Okay. So I mean like, if it did, if you had to put it in that jar or whatever–
CLINIC-3: Mhm.
WOMAN: Like, what if it was like, like what if it was like twitching or like something like that? Like?
01:33:00
CLINIC-3: The solution will make it stop.
WOMAN: Okay. Okay.
CLINIC-3: [Laughter] It’s not gonna be moving around in the jar.
WOMAN: Oh okay, the solution would make it like—
CLINIC-3: Yeah. That’s the whole purpose of the solution.
WOMAN: Okay. So like if it looked like it was breathing or something like that–
CLINIC-3: It will automatically stop. It won’t be able to breathe anymore. Not in the, not with the solution.
WOMAN: Ok. So I’m not even gonna see it.
CLINIC-3: No.
WOMAN: Okay, so like if that happens–
CLINIC-3: You’re asleep, they take it out and it goes into our lab
where they do the stuff with the jar and cleaning and all of that.
WOMAN: Ok. So what is the solution, it’s just like–something like toxic or something?
CLINIC-3: Yeah

The Media Matters article starts off:

“The anti-abortion rights group Live Action released
today an undercover video claiming to reveal “illegal and inhuman
practices” at an abortion clinic in New York City, and accused a doctor
at the clinic of committing murder. The video reveals nothing of the
sort, and actually undermines Live Action’s baseless allegations that
the clinic is performing illegal procedures and endangering the lives of
patients.”

In this short opening paragraph, Media Matters blogger Simon Maloy
commits a logical fallacy called “The Straw Man Fallacy.” The Straw Man
Fallacy is committed when a person distorts the position of their
opponent, and then attacks the distorted position as if it were the
person’s actual position. The technique of committing a Straw Man
fallacy can be shown in an equation (taken from The Nizkor Project” website )
1. Person A has position X
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distortion of X)
3. Person B attacks position Y
4. Therefore, X is false/incorrect/flawed.
Media Matters wants to attack the credibility of Live Action. They
say “Live Action….accused a doctor at the clinic of committing murder.”
They then link to Live Action’s press release. Perhaps the editors at
Media Matters do not expect their readers to check original sources and
think critically, because nowhere in the press release does Live Action
directly accuse the doctor of murder. Rather, Live Action calls for an
investigation.

“A clinician’s discussion of the murder of born-alive
infants at Dr. Emily’s Women’s Center necessitates immediate
investigation. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman should launch a
criminal investigation into Dr. Emily’s Women’s Center and Brian Park.
New York State Department of Health should launch a license
investigation into Brian Park.”

No direct accusation of murder was made against the doctor. Live
Action is merely saying that in light of the evidence, and in light of
the many stories and testimonies of infanticide that have been
publicized recently, of which the Gosnell incident is only one, the
clinic should be investigated. This may seem like it’s splitting hairs,
but the distinction is an important one. Live Action is not jumping the
gun and making a murder accusation. Proof of guilt is not required to
launch an investigation- only suspicion of guilt. There is enough
evidence to warrant an investigation.
Media Matters does more than just misrepresent Live Action’s position. They also say the following:

“….Live Action edited out from the video the portion in
which the clinician makes clear that the situation they’re talking about
has never happened in her experience and the discussion is
hypothetical, and the video shows the counselor explaining to the woman
that the doctor would have to resuscitate the baby if that situation did
occur.”

The problem here is that the clinic worker never said that such an
event never happened. Her words, as stated above, were the following:

“No, we never had that for ages, of being it would survive this, no.”

The exact meaning of this statement is unclear. It sounds quite a bit
like “no, we haven’t had that in ages.” Is this what the clinic worker
meant? That would imply that it has happened before. The truth is, only
one person knows exactly what the statement means- the clinic worker. An
implication by a clinic worker that a baby may have been born alive in
the past warrants an investigation.
If a police officer asked a suspect “have you ever killed anyone?”
and he said “never, not for ages” should the officer shrug his shoulders
and say, “Oh, I guess he’s innocent” and let him walk out the door? Or
should he question the subject further? Very few officers would simply
let the suspect walk- nor should they. Incidentally, the clinic worker
also said that “that’s the purpose of the solution” while explaining it
would kill the living baby. Another possible admission.

It is true that a second clinic worker said to the pregnant woman
that a baby born alive would have to be treated, and she is on tape
saying this. But the first clinic worker seemed pretty adamant that a
baby born alive in the clinic would NOT be treated. What do you do if
you’re conducting an investigation and two witnesses contradict
eachother? Do you drop the investigation? Imagine that two individuals
believed to be part of a drug dealing ring and are taken into custody
and questioned separately. One says, “Why yes, we deal drugs” and the
other says, “No, we don’t deal drugs” what should the police do? Should
they let both suspects go, on the word of the one, or should they
question them further? What would we think of police who let the
suspects go because of their conflicting stories? The logical thing to
do would be clear- investigate further. And this is what Live Action is
calling for.

One wonders that if the unedited tape was so damaging and Live Action
so deceitful, why the unedited footage is made so easily available on
Live Action’s youtube channel for anyone to see, and why the full
transcript, not the edited one, appears on Live Action’s website. If
Live Action was going to deceive people, why post the unedited material
at all, much less in multiple, easy to find places.

No. Media Matters’ accusations are off base. The video footage Live
Action shot, though not proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that
infanticide is occurring, is very troubling. And an investigation into
the possible practice of infanticide at Dr. Emily’s Woman’s Clinic is
justified- in fact, it’s common sense.

At least one Democrat is going to help us end gendercide… Or is he?

These days it doesn’t feel like Democrats and Republicans agree on
much. But at least one Democratic Congressman has seen the documentary
film It’s A Girl and feels strongly that gendercide in China and India is wrong and must be stopped.
According to a press release by the film’s creators,

Congressmen Chris Smith (R-NJ), Jim Moran (D-VA), and
Mark Meadows (R-NC) joined with the nonpartisan Coalition Against
Gendercide to host a special screening of It’s A Girl in the
Capitol building in Washington D.C., in conjunction with the Tom Lantos
Commission on Human Rights. The members of Congress were joined by
congressional staff, NGO leaders and members of the media for this
groundbreaking event.

The extent to which we stand by on the sidelines and
don’t do anything about it makes us culpable as well. Today, what this
country and this world needs to be about is ending gendercide because it
is…inexcusable.

And Congressman Meadows had this to say:

We talk about wanting to find more common ground in Washington DC.
And this is an issue where Democrats and Republicans can absolutely
agree. Gendercide must be stopped.

As happy as I am to see a Democrat agreeing to take action on
gendercide – a move with which I am in wholehearted agreement - I can’t
help but wish Moran wasn’t such a hypocrite.

Last May, the House voted on
a bill called the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, or PRENDA. It would
have imposed fines on doctors who knowingly participated in gender-based
abortions. The bill failed, with most Republicans voting for it and
most Democrats voting against it. Guess who was one of those Democrats? That’s right! Rep. Jim “Gendercide Is Bad Except In America” Moran.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) asked rhetorically, “Since when did
America subscribe to the idea that males are worth more than females?”
Why, that’s a darn fine question, ma’am. “It’s sick, it’s
discriminatory, it’s sexist and it is blatantly anti-woman and
anti-human,” she added.

So what was the Democratic response?

Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, asserted Wednesday that the bill “tramples (on) the rights
of women under the guise of nondiscrimination, while doing absolutely
nothing to provide women with needed resources for their babies, female
and male.”

This is an argument that makes my eyes involuntarily roll up into
my head every time I hear it. The “pro-lifers actually do nothing for
babies” argument. Here’s something we do that you don’t: WE LET THEM
LIVE. I would say that’s step one towards providing them with “needed
resources,” wouldn’t you? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say “needed
resource” numero uno is LIFE.

But here’s my favorite from a Democrat who voted against PRENDA:

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, said nobody he has talked to favors abortion based on sex preferences…

Um, you do, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer. You just
voted against outlawing sex-selective abortion, and now you’re saying
you don’t know anybody who favors it? Is it Opposite Day? I’m so
confused right now.

It’s a lot easier for Moran, the Democrat in the trio of congressmen who brought It’s A Girl
to Capitol Hill, to condemn gendercide abroad than it is at home. And
it’s far easier to condemn sex-selective abortion than all abortion.

I’m overjoyed that gendercide is being brought to light, and I’m
happy to see Rep. Moran standing up against some abortion, if not all.
I’m happy because stopping gendercide will stop a lot of abortions. I’m
happy because if we are successful at ending gendercide, we will end a
lot of killing. And isn’t that exactly what we’re trying to do?

If we just start with sex-selective abortion and forced abortion,
if we were to just end those, do you have any idea how many lives we
will have saved?

But Moran needs to put his votes where his mouth is. If abortion
and infanticide based on gender are wrong elsewhere, why aren’t they
wrong here? And why doesn’t he have the courage to say so?

The culture of gendercide in China and India has to be stopped not
only for the babies who lose their lives and the mothers who lose their
children, but for the prison it creates for the women who do survive.
The effects of son-preference cultures – expressed most clearly by the
dowry system in India and the results of the One Child Policy in China –
are far-reaching and complex. They lead to not only abortion and
infanticide but rape, kidnapping, human trafficking, sex slavery, and
rampant suicide.

But not only do we have to stop gendercide in Asia, we have to do
it everywhere. No, it is not the overwhelming problem in the U.S. that
it is in China and India, but it does happen – especially among
immigrants from son-preference cultures. And it is always unacceptable.

I am unable to sort out the tangle of conflicting views Moran and
his Democratic cohorts hold about when, where, and who it is okay to
abort. But I pleasantly recall that truth always leads to more
truth. Educating people about gendercide anywhere is not only going to save actual lives; it’s going to expose more people to the reality of abortion.

And that is a very good thing.

If you haven’t seen It’s A Girl, visit the website and find out where and how you can view it or host a screening.

Fact checking clinic workers claims about laminaria

Live Action released a video yesterday (April 28, 2013) which
showed a clinic worker from New York telling a pregnant woman who posed
as an abortion patient that if she gave birth to a living breathing
baby, the baby would be suspended in a poisonous solution that would
“make it stop [breathing.]”

In another part of the transcript the
clinic worker warns the pregnant woman about the laminaria, small
seaweed sticks that dilate the cervix before an abortion. The laminaria
is inserted a day or two before the baby is taken out of the womb. The
purpose of the laminaria is to dilate the cervix so that the instruments
can be inserted without too much damage to the mother. The clinic
worker tells the prospective client that the seaweed sticks are toxic
and will kill the baby. She then adds that the woman must come back for
an abortion once the laminaria is in place, or her life will be in
danger.

CLINIC-3: The seaweed is where the heartbeat, that’s what kills the heartbeat. As well.
WOMAN: Oh really
CLINIC-3: Yes. The sticks that are, they’re toxic.
WOMAN: Oh really.
CLINIC-3: So if you don’t come back the next day, that could be your life at risk.
WOMAN: Oh my God, yeah.
CLINIC-3: So that’s why we make sure we tell patients to make sure,
because you some some [sic]patients they’re like, Oh my God, they change
their mind–
WOMAN: Yeah, oh my gosh–
CLINIC-3: And then, they never come back

WOMAN: and then what would happen to them, like –
[interruption] So like what would happen to those girls then, what would
they have to do?
CLINIC—3: well they’ll end up in the emergency room and they’ll still
have to do it, because the emergency room will have to take it out.
WOMAN: …. So they’re not going to try to reverse the decision or anything?
CLINIC-3: you can’t, because your child will come out say, either
stillborn, or it will come out not normal, you know missing parts,
deformed. It’s just toxic.… It has to be 100%. You have to be 100% that
you want to do this.

Now, before we go on, a reality check. It is true that if a woman has
laminaria placed inside of her and then goes home and never seeks
medical attention, her life can be in danger because laminaria left in
too long can, and likely will, cause an infection. In fact, this is how Edrica Goode, a Planned Parenthood abortion patient, died.
However, it is not true that once the laminaria is inserted it is too
late for the woman to change her mind. It is also not true that the
seaweed sticks are toxic and kill the baby, or that the woman can’t
change her mind after the laminaria has been inserted.
First let’s look at the website of an abortion clinic in Rochester,
New York called Freedom of Choice OB/GYN. When describing a second
trimester abortion procedure, the website says:

“If a woman changes her mind about the abortion and has
the laminaria removed without going through with the procedure,
miscarriage is more likely to occur.”

This clinic’s website reveals that laminaria can be removed, making
miscarriage “more likely” – but it says nothing about deformed babies.
And in another pro-choice source, The Abortion Resource Handbook,
which is a kind of “how-to” guide for women seeking abortions, abortion
patients are advised:

“If you change your mind, laminaria can be removed and
dilation stopped at any time before the abortion. However, stopping the
procedure at this point may increase your risk for miscarriage,
infection, and other complications.”(1)

So while this pro-choice book, which in other chapters demonizes
pro-lifers and labels crisis pregnancy centers dishonest and
manipulative, admits that it is not impossible to reverse an abortion in
the second trimester even after the laminaria have been placed. And
while the book does make it clear that there is some health risk, it is
hardly true that laminaria are “toxic” or that the woman’s life would be
in danger from their removal. A second trimester abortion, when
completed, is not without risk either – in fact, it is more common for a woman to suffer serious complications from a second trimester abortion than from a first trimester one.
If the medical doctors are trying to save the baby, laminaria must be
removed. In an abortion procedure, the laminaria is removed anyway and
forceps are used to tear apart the developing child. It is hard to
imagine that removing the laminaria without inserting instruments into
the womb would be more dangerous than removing it and in addition doing
an invasive, destructive procedure with forceps.
There have also been a number of stories of women who have reversed their abortions and given birth to healthy children.
According to an article in National Catholic Register, a
baby named Claire Stout was born at 5 pounds, 2 ounces. She was a
normal, healthy baby. Claire however, had been scheduled to be aborted
at 20 weeks. Her mother, Jamie Stout, had already undergone the first
part of an abortion procedure when she changed her mind due to the
intervention of pro-life sidewalk counselors. The laminaria had already
been inserted.
Stout was brought to the ER, the laminaria were removed, and a
miscarriage was averted. Her baby was born healthy only a few months
later.
None of the doctors who worked to save baby Claire indicated that her
mother’s life was in danger at any time due to stopping the abortion.In 2011, a Chicago woman
had her laminaria inserted at Family planning Associates, Albany
Medical-Surgical Center, which performs abortions into the third
trimester. She then decided she wanted to save her baby. She contacted
The Chicago Pro-Life Action League, who sent her to the emergency room
at Resurrection Medical Center, and she was seen by pro-life OB/GYN who
removed the laminaria. She went on to deliver healthy baby. The hospital
developed an arrangement with pro-lifers that allowed women who change
their minds to go there and have her laminaria removed.
Only a few weeks later, a second woman at the same abortion clinic
changed her mind, had her laminaria removed, and gave birth to healthy
twins.
The Huffington Post also covered the story.

Their article “Resurrection Medical Center Helping Women Stop
Abortions-In-Progress, Gets Pro-Choice Support” discusses the
arrangement between pro-life activists and the Catholic hospital. Note
that nowhere in the Huffington Post article, which freely quotes Planned
Parenthood, does anyone imply that laminaria kills the baby, nor does
anyone say that removing the laminaria is dangerous to the mother.

There have been few studies on the outcomes for women who have
decided to stop their abortions, have the laminaria removed and have
their babies. According to an article
in the Standard Examiner a study at Tel Aviv University in Israel found
that out of 21 women who had the laminaria removed, four changed their
minds again and went on to have the abortions, two had premature
deliveries, and only one had a miscarriage. The other 14 had full-term
healthy pregnancies. It does not seem that any of the women in the study
dealt with life-threatening conditions.
Anecdotal evidence, pro-choice testimony, and the study suggest that
abortions can be reversed even after the laminaria is in place and that
these reversals are not dangerous to women. It is also clear that if
the woman did go through the first stage of having an abortion at Dr.
Emily’s Woman’s Clinic, and did change her mind, the clinic worker may
have successfully convinced her that it is too late to save her baby.
1. K. Kaufmann The Abortion Resource Handbook (Touchstone, 1997) 153

Tonight, Live Action President Lila Rose will be appearing on The
O’Reilly Factor with Bill O’Reilly at 8pm EST to discuss our latest
investigative release, “Inhuman: Undercover in America’s Late-Term Abortion Industry“. The O’Reilly Factor is currently the most watched cable news program in the United States.

Check your local listings to find out what time The O’Reilly Factor airs in your area.
Yesterday Live Action released ground-breaking undercover footage
from an abortion clinic in the Bronx, NY, documenting a clinic worker
describing in gruesome detail what should happen to a baby who survives
an abortion, and tells the woman to “flush it!” Watch the disturbing footage here.
Today, we released another earth-shattering investigative video,
which documented a leading abortionist in Washington, D.C. saying that
he would leave a baby to die, if it was born-alive after a failed
abortion. Watch this shocking video here.

The Planned Parenthood Action Fund recently released a video
advocating for abortion coverage for United States Peace Corps
volunteers. The video featured Latanya Mapp Frett, a former Peace Corps
volunteer, who shared: “I joined the peace corps with the hope that I
would be able to do something to help people, and really what I found
was a career path.” A career path that eventually led to her current
position as Planned Parenthood– Global Federation of America’s Vice
President.In
the video, Latanya explains why Peace Corps volunteers should (in her
opinion) have their personal abortions paid for by the Peace Corps.
Although the title of the video is “Peace Corps Equity– Abortion
Coverage for Volunteers” the word “abortion” is not used in the actual
video. Rather, the old thirteen-syllable nice-sounding alternative,
“comprehensive sexual reproductive health care,” is used . Simply put,
the video supports a bill by Sen. Frank Lautenberg called the Peace
Corps Equity Act, which aims to appropriate funds to abortion coverage
for Peace Corps volunteers which have heretofore been excluded. Here’s
the video:
Planned Parenthood released a statement about the bill, saying:

Planned Parenthood applauds Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
(D-NJ) for introducing the Peace Corps Equity Act, which would extend to
Peace Corps Volunteers the same coverage for abortion services that
most other women with federal health care already receive. Current
policy denies coverage of abortion for Peace Corps Volunteers even when a
woman has been raped or faces a life-threatening pregnancy.

Unsurprisingly, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the ACLU,
and many other pro-abortion organizations have also been vocal in their
support of the bill. The Peace Corps itself demonstrates strong
sympathies towards the abortion movement, too. For example, their
bulletin for returned volunteers, called “Hotline,” provides job recommendations in the abortion industry.
Here are a few tidbits from the Planned Parenthood video:

“Women in the Peace Corps should be able to make personal
healthcare decisions. Women in the Peace Corps deserve the same access
to healthcare as any other woman serving our country. Women in the Peace
Corps should never have to face sexual assault, but if and when they do
they should have access to comprehensive sexual reproductive health
services… No Peace Corps volunteer should face life endangerment because
they have no access to the procedures that are available in the United
States”

There are a few misnomers in Ms. Mapp Frett’s statements. First, the
absence of federal coverage for the abortions of Peace Corps volunteers
does not infringe on a woman’s ability to make “personal healthcare
decision.” In fact, the Peace Corps not only pays for transportation to
and from the location in which a volunteer may obtain a legal abortion
while she is working for the organization, but they also provide guidance on
how she can confidentially use her own Peace Corps funds to pay for the
procedure. The Corps also pays for complications that may (and often do) result from the abortion. It simply does not pay for the abortion itself.
Another misnomer is the insinuation that a volunteer could face life
endangerment solely based on the government not paying for her abortion.
Time and again physicians have demonstrated
that therapeutic abortion is not a necessary element of the life-saving
medical regimen that many pregnant women require. While treatment may
sometimes result in the death of the unborn baby, directly killing the
child by means of an abortion –which the Peace Corps Equity Act aims to
cover– does not help medically-compromised women (despite the stories
that are inaccurately exploited
by the abortion lobby). Therefore the argument that lack of federal
funding for Peace Corps volunteers’ abortions directly causes “life
endangerment” is not valid. According to the Association of Pro-Life
Physicians:

We have the technology and expertise to provide quality
healthcare to a pregnant woman without intentionally killing her unborn
baby, regardless of the severity of her disease.

Real women’s healthcare, and real care for Peace Corps volunteers,
will not come from heightened abortion rates and financially-sponsored
abortions. Tell your senator what you think about the Peace Corps Equity
Act and the care that women truly deserve by contacting them.

Kermit Gosnell’s defense attorney laid out his case for acquittal on
five counts of murder this morning but the specifics were telegraphed as
far back as the trial’s opening statements six weeks ago.
According to Jack McMahon, even the District Attorney (who is an
African-American) was part of an “elitist, racist prosecution” of a man
so kindly that he puts Marcus Welby, MD, to shame.
Proof? “Dr. Gosnell is not the only one doing abortions in
Philadelphia,” McMahon said, “but he was an African American singled out
for prosecution.”
“We know why he was targeted,” he said, according to CNSNews.com.
“If you can’t see that reality, you’re living in some sort of la-la
land.”

And that was just part of McMahon’s two-hour closing. The four
first-degree murder charges for babies the prosecution said were
aborted alive and then murdered when their necks were slit were “four
isolated incidents” at a clinic that performed “thousands and thousands
of abortions,” and “20 to 30 a day,” reported CNS News’ Elizabeth
Harrington. On top of that Gosnell’s Women’s Medical Society abortion
clinic wasn’t the pigsty the prosecution alleged.
And, to tie a bow on his rebuttal of prosecution charges, McMahon
announced (again) that none of the babies were born alive; all were
killed in utero by an injection of digoxin.
Of course, there are a few inconvenient facts that point in the opposite direction. Here are five of 400,000.

#1. Gosnell could not be charged with more murders because—and only
because–the Grand Jury said records had disappeared. The Grand Jury
believed that Gosnell had killed hundreds of viable unborn babies past
24 weeks—the limit in Pennsylvania.
#2. The pictures McMahon showed the jury disproved the allegation
that Gosnell’s abortion clinic was a “House of Horrors.” But it was not
just his former employees who testified to the horrific conditions or
the conclusion of the Grand Jury. It was verified by officials who came
to the abortion clinic after a raid on what authorities thought was an
illegal “pill mill” found a “wretched, filthy place.” By the time the
Grand Jury visited the abortion clinic, the facility had been
substantially cleaned up. Even so “The walls appeared to be
urine-splattered,” the Grand Jury concluded, backed up by witnesses.
“The procedure tables were old and one had a ripped plastic cover.
Suction tubing, which was used for abortion procedures – and doubled as
the only available suction source for resuscitation – was corroded. A
large, dirty fish tank stood in the waiting room, filled with turtles
and fish. The dirt-floored basement was stuffed with patient files,
plants, junk, and boxes of un-disposed-of medical waste. The entire
facility smelled foul.”

#3. Gosnell’s own former staff testified that he was so wretchedly
incompetent he stopped using digoxin. Specifically, “because Gosnell was
not skillful enough to successfully administer digoxin, late-term
babies continued to be born alive, and he continued to kill them by
slitting their necks.” Kareema Cross testified to the Grand Jury, “So he
tried to do the needle in the stomach and that’s what was supposed to
have killed the baby before the baby came out, but if it didn’t, he’ll
say, oh, well, the law says that I can do it. I can still slit the
baby’s neck because it didn’t work. The needle didn’t work.” To which
the Grand Jury added in its report, “And according to his staff, the
needle never worked. So Gosnell stopped trying and reverted to his old
system of killing babies after they were born.”

And, of course, ignore all that testimony about babies who were born
alive; who even screamed and were dispatched in a manner that Gosnell’s
right-hand man likened to a “beheading.”
#4. You would think from McMahon’s remarks that Gosnell practically
accepted vegetables from the gardens of “desperate young girls” in
payment. In fact, as the prosecution and the Grand Jury made clear,
Gosnell made millions.

#5. And never, ever forget that the entire medical bureaucracy in
Pennsylvania—and the Abortion Establishment, as represented by (among
others) the National Abortion Federation—consciously turned a blind eye,
in spite of overwhelming evidence of Gosnell’s illegal and incompetent
behavior. The only reason he is on trial is because the feds were
convinced Gosnell was illegally selling prescription drugs, particularly
OxyContin, and raided his abortion clinic in West Philadelphia.
We will talk about the prosecution’s closing arguments tomorrow morning.

Monday, April 29, 2013

Prominent British writer and producer Samantha Brick has spoken of
her devastating experience with IVF in a recent column in the Daily
Mail. The article sparked hundreds of comments - some very supportive,
most extremely critical.Brick,
a 43-year-old twice-married journalist, has for the last two years been
attempting to fall pregnant via IVF. It has been an extremely traumatic
time. Commenting on the death of IVF pioneer Robert Edwards, Brick says
she never knew what IVF involved:

Irrational as it might sound… I see this eminent professor as
unwittingly responsible for the agony I have endured since discovering,
four years ago, that my husband and I are unable to conceive a child
together naturally.

"If IVF didn’t exist, I believe we would
have, eventually, got on with our lives. Instead, we submitted ourselves
to the roller coaster of fertility treatment. And our world has been on
hold, in a terrible emotional limbo, ever since."

Whilst acknowledging that IVF has brought the joy of parenthood to
many couples, Brick says that her personal experience shows how
emotionally and physically draining the procedure can be:

"The treatment has failed twice now, and
the emotional fall-out remains nothing short of devastating. I am prone
to weeping fits and depressive episodes, and I cannot be around pregnant
women or young children. I didn’t just suffer during the treatment —
I’m still experiencing these symptoms today

Two IVF stories from opposite ends of the globe are a sobering
reminder that “foetal reduction” remains a failsafe position in clinical
practice. In the UK, Sharon Turner gave birth to quadruplets last month
-- two sets of identical twins – a one in 70 million occurrence. She
and her husband Julian were married in 2007 and turned to IVF after they
failed to have children. She became pregnant on her fourth attempt –
luckily, because the couple had spent 40,000 pounds, all their savings,
on the IVF cycles.

News of the quads came as a shock, but the Turners were delighted.
But specialists at John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford warned that there
were dangers in the birth. Mrs Turner told the Daily Mail:
“They gave us three options: get rid of all of them, get rid of two of
them or keep them. There was no way we could get rid of them. We were
happy to let nature take its course.” The quads were born 11 weeks
premature on March 30. They are still in hospital but are in relatively
good health and will go home soon.

On the other side of the world, in Surat, India, doctors at the
Newbirth IVF Gujarat Institute of Reproductive Medicine implanted five
embryos in a 40-year-old woman, in the hope that one or two would
survive. All of them did.

Then the specialists performed what the Times of India
described, somewhat bizarrely, as a “rare IVF experiment”, or foetal
reduction: “In this procedure, potassium chloride is injected into the
fetal heart to make it stop functioning.” Three of the five foetuses
were killed in this fashion. After 37 weeks of pregnancy the mother
delivered healthy twins.

Clinic worker’s statement implies opposition to informed consent

The newsroom has already published a piece with a description of the video, a portion of the press release, and the video of the investigation.
The investigation took place at the Dr. Emily Women’s Health Center
in the Bronx, New York. The video involves a woman 23 weeks pregnant
speaking to a clinic worker about a possible abortion, which would be a
two-day procedure.

The video, which is slightly over eight minutes, mostly is a
conversation between this woman and a specific clinic worker. The clinic
worker claims that she has worked at the center since she was 16,
meaning “it’ll be 11 years” since she started working there. Thus, the
clinic worker has experience and should know how to appropriately
discuss such a procedure. This worker seems to be familiar with
answering questions, but she does not treat the issue at hand very
seriously and laughs a few times in the video.

Arguably most horrific of all is how this clinic worker says, “If it
comes out, it comes out” and advises the woman to “flush it” if
premature birth happens at home.
Another issue which this clinic worker does not seem to take very
seriously is informed consent. While she is answering the woman’s
questions about a two-day late-term abortion procedure, her comment
brushes aside the complexity of it all when she says to the woman, “I
mean, I don’t know why you want to know all this!”

New York does not have an informed consent law. Americans United for Life ranked the state as 48th-most pro-life for 2012. The Guttmacher Institute also does not include New York in its charts of
the 27 states with “Detailed Abortion-Specific Informed Consent
Requirements” or the 8 states with “Customary Informed Consent
Provisions.” And where such laws do exist, such as in South Dakota,
where it was required that a woman be told of the abortion-suicide link,
Planned Parenthood sued.
New York may be very liberal with its abortion laws. But still, if
abortion clinics like the Dr. Emily Center and abortion workers like the
clinic worker there want to claim they are for women and support
women’s rights and choices, then why are they wondering, with a
dismissive nature, why a woman wants to know about a two-day procedure
she may go through? Keeping women in the dark and laughing them off does
not seem to be very pro-choice or pro-woman.

Born alive after abortions part 6: Baby Rowan

In previous articles, Live Action has covered cases where
babies born alive after abortions were denied medical care and allowed
to die, or, in some cases, were killed by direct action. The recent
trial of Kermit Gosnell shows that these incidents continue to occur.
The sheer number of cases we know about leads one to wonder how often
babies are born alive but no one outside the abortion clinic ever knows.

In April of 2005, a pregnant woman named “Angele,” decided to abort her 22 week old unborn baby. She was in her 30s, divorced, and already had two children. She did not want a third child. She chose Orlando Women’s Center,
also called EPOC Clinic operated by Dr. James Pendergraft. The abortion
clinic’s website advertises “3 minute pain-free abortions.” The Orlando
Women’s Center has published newspaper ads offering abortions up to 28 weeks.
Angele had named her baby Rowan. She chose a method of abortion that
she hoped would cause the child a minimum of suffering- an injection of
digoxin in the heart to kill him, rather than dismemberment by D&E.
The abortionist first had to insert laminaria, small sticks that
expand inside the woman and dilate the cervix, making the abortion
procedure easier. Before the insertion of laminaria, Angele was given a
sedative. In her own words:

“The injection burned a lot as it went in. … The
discomfort was distracting. I still felt the ‘lams’ as they were being
inserted. Dr. Perper told me to relax my muscles and noted that my
cervix was slightly soft. I asked him what that meant and he said it was
good.”

Angele says the clinic workers discussed injecting the digoxin, but
they never did. She described the doctor Harry Perper, MD, as “a very
fast moving, hyperactive type of person.”
When Angele went back to the hotel, she continued to feel her baby
kick. This confused her because she had been led to believe that the
baby would be dead. At one point, in the middle of the night, while the
baby was still kicking, she considered calling the clinic’s after-hours
line, but decided not to.
The next morning, Angele took the pills meant to cause her body to
expel her baby. She arrived at the clinic around 9 am. She was ushered
into a room and told that her doctor would not be in the clinic until
2pm, and that if she delivered before then, without him present, she
would have to stay and be examined by him. Angele was given a blanket
and a heating pad, and left alone to go through labor.
The contractions began. At one point, the pain became intense and she
asked clinic worker “Violene” if she could be given anything to ease
the pain. She also told Violene that she thought she was about to
deliver. Violene told her she was not ready, and left her again. In Angele’s own words:

“I came back to the sofa, (they both really smelled
awful), wrapped up in the wet and sour-smelling blanket, then decided it
was better without it. I rocked back and forth on my hands and knees,
trying to hold the heating pad to my stomach to both relieve the pain
and try to stay warm. I was looking down and saw little smears and spots
of dried blood on the floor and an old cotton ball with blood on it by
the fabric-covered sofa across from me. Noticing how dirty it was and
how no one was in the room or even nearby in the hallway began to make
me nervous and uncomfortable. I went right back to the powder room and
began to try to push a lot. I thought it might help since I was told I
was not nearly ready to deliver.”
“In one agonizing push, I felt and heard something come out. Then
immediately another push. I was weak. I just held my head in my hands
for a moment. Then I decided to stand up. I looked. There was my baby,
the whitish cord and what I thought surely must be the placenta. “I
started sobbing and lay down in the floor. I stared and stared at my
son. I was horrified that I had just had him in a commode.” “His right
leg moved. He curled up a bit like he was cold; I screamed for Violene!
No one came. I managed to get to the doorway, pants down, blood
everywhere and yelled again. I went back to my baby. I heard her say
she’d be right there.
“I showed her Rowan, told her he was alive and moving and to call
911! She took a quick look, said he’s not moving now and she’d be back
to take care of things while walking out. I called her again. I was
touching Rowan softly and he moved again. I called her back. Rowan
jumped, I think startled by the loud sound of my calling for help. I
showed her that he was moving and alive. I begged her to hurry and call
911, now!”

The clinic worker took one look at the moving baby and told Angele
that she would get her supervisor. But the minutes ticked by, and no one
came. It became clear to Angele that Violene was not going to summon
help. She grabbed her phone and quickly dialed her friend, pleading with
her to call 911 and send paramedics to save her baby. Listen to the call here.
Angele continued to be left alone with her son, who she said reacted to her voice. All she could do was try and comfort him:

“I stayed beside Rowan talking to him, telling him how
strong he was being and how proud I was of him. I told him God must
really want us to be together for him to make it through everything he
had just been through and that Mommy was so sorry but so happy to have a
chance to love him. I told him he was a strong little miracle and that I
couldn’t wait for him to meet his brother and sister. I just kept
touching him, trying to warm him with my hands and talking to him so he
would not feel any more afraid than he already must.”

Finally, the baby stopped moving as Angele waited for help.
She cradled the dead baby and began to pray, filled with remorse for
choosing to undergo the abortion. A staff member came and demanded that
she give her the baby. Angele refused, and continued to hold on to
Rowan. The clinic workers left her alone briefly but returned to
pressure her to give up the body of the child.
Meanwhile, the police (not the paramedics) showed up at the clinic.
It was later found out that the paramedics had come, but a clinic
worker, thought to be Violene, told them that a patient had merely
“passed some tissue” and that “the physician had the situation under
control.”(1) She convinced them not to enter the clinic. (The physician
was not in the clinic at all when Violene told them this)

Baby Rowan

When Violene came back after talking to the police, Angele said:

“I spoke to her telling her how little I appreciated them
telling the police my child was not alive. I stared hard at her and
said, ‘Violene you saw him moving. That is when you were supposedly
going to get your manager and “take care of it.” You stayed away until
Rowan died. I don’t care what you say, you and I both know he was very
much alive. We know the truth.’ She said nothing and turned away.

Although the doctor had never arrived and Angele had been told she
had to be examined by him, the clinic workers seemed to want nothing
more than to get her (and her friend, who had arrived) out of the
clinic. They gave her a bag with medicine in it and ushered them both
out the door.
Angele wanted an autopsy to be performed to prove Rowan was born alive. The local coroner refused to do it. Eventually, an autopsy was performed
by Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Jan C. Garavaglia. The medical examiner
was unable to determine whether Rowan had been born alive, because she
did not find air in his lungs. However, she also found that, as Angele
had said, the baby had most likely never been injected with Dixogin
(there were no needle marks anywhere on the baby’s body, which would
have been left had the injection occurred.) Dr. Garavaglia stated that
it was “probable” that Rowan’s heart had been beating and that,
therefore, he had been born alive. Without air in the lungs, however, it
could not be officially proven. You can see Rowan’s autopsy report here.
No action was ever taken against the clinic for Rowan’s death.
Angele later wrote a letter to Operation Rescue’s Troy Newman in which she said in part:

“Thank you very much for your kindness. It is amazing the out pour of kind words and support I am receiving after Rowan’s death.
I wish that I had such a network and support before, I would still be
pregnant. …I hope that women will see my humiliation and remorse and
seek forgiveness if they are post abortive.
I want to do everything in my power to see that this does not happen to other babies or mothers.
I want women in crisis pregnancies to see that whether they are of 6
weeks or 28 weeks gestation, that abortion will haunt them for the rest
of their lives. I would like for them to know that no matter how little
you want the pregnancy itself, you will want, love and cherish your
child. Those 9 months of crisis are the toughest. If you make it through
that, the rewards come 1000 fold!…. It is very shameful to step forward
and admit publicly that I have been so wrong as to “choose” to take the
life of my child. On the other hand if it will accomplish any or all of
the above, then it is my duty, isn’t it? That is so long as I protect
the children I have here first and foremost. I know God wants me to put
them first, just as I should have with Rowan.”

British applaud 'historic' ruling for midwives who refuse to participate in abortion

Editor’s note: Mary Doogan and Connie Wood, two Roman Catholic midwives, have won what the Scotsman newspaper called “a historic ruling from appeal judges in Edinburgh to avoid any participation in abortions.”
The dispute arose when Doogan’s and Wood’s employers–National Health
Service Greater Glasgow and Clyde–reorganized abortion services in
2007. Mid-term and late-term abortions would be performed on the labor
ward rather than on the gynecology ward and the midwives were told they
had to oversee abortion procedures.

Mary Doogan, left, and Connie Wood won an historic ruling for conscience rights.

Central to Doogan’s and Wood’s defense was that previously they were
not called on to delegate, supervise or support staff engaged in the
care of patients undergoing abortions.
The Abortion Act of 1967 states that no one with a conscientious
objection can be obliged to participate in abortion procedures.
“However, the hospital management insisted that a conscientious
objection clause in the 1967 Abortion Act applied only to active
participation in a termination and did not cover the women’s duties to
delegate, supervise and support staff,” The Scotsman reported.
The appeal judges ruled otherwise.
The following comes from SPUC.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) welcomed
today’s verdict in the appeal by two Glasgow midwives fighting for their
right to opt out of abortion.
Connie Wood and Mary Doogan, who won their appeal against the Greater
Glasgow and Clyde Health Board, are senior midwives each with more than
20 years’ experience and had the role of Labour Ward Co-ordinators.

SPUC has given the midwives its backing throughout the case. Responding
to the judgment, Paul Tully, SPUC’s general secretary, told the media
earlier today:
“Today’s verdict is very welcome and we congratulate Connie and Mary on
their tenacity and deep sense of professionalism. We hope that the
Health Board will abide by this verdict and enable life to return to
normal for Connie and Mary. The result is a tremendous victory for these
devoted and caring professional women. This outcome will be a great
relief to all midwives, nurses and doctors who may be under pressure to
supervise abortion procedures and who are wondering whether the law
protects their right to opt out.

The difference this judgment makes is that hospital managers must
recognise that the legal right to opt out of abortion goes beyond those
who directly undertake abortions. For the sake of good morale and good
relations with all members of staff, it is important that the Board move
to re-establish normal working relations straight away. The mothers and
babies depending on the Southern General Hospital deserve no less.

“Mary Doogan and Connie Wood deserve the fullest support and gratitude
of their medical colleagues for resisting the pressure to give up their
legal protections. It is important to recognise that their stand applies
to people of all faiths and none: the right to refuse to participate in
abortion is based on conscientious objection, whether religious or
purely moral, so it applies to everyone.
They are anxious to get back to normal after the protracted internal
grievance procedure and legal action. This dispute has seriously
disrupted their professional lives over the past 4 years and more.”Statement by Connie Wood and Mary Doogan:

“Connie and I are absolutely delighted with today’s judgement from the
Court of Session, which recognises and upholds our rights of
conscientious objection as labour ward midwifery sisters to withdraw
from participating in any treatment that would result in medical
termination of pregnancy.
In holding all life to be sacred from conception to natural death, as
midwives we have always worked in the knowledge we have two lives to
care for throughout labour; a mother and that of her unborn child.

Today’s judgement is a welcome affirmation of the rights of all
midwives to withdraw from a practice that would violate their conscience
and which over time, would indeed debar many from entering what has
always been a very rewarding and noble profession. We hope that
GG&CHB will respect the court’s decision so that we can return to
considerations that are all to do with child birth and midwifery
practice and less to do with legal matters.
We wish to thank the many individuals the length and breadth of Britain
and, indeed, further afield, who have given us great help and support
throughout the duration of our dispute with GG&CHB. Though too
numerous to individually highlight, special mention has to be given to
both sets of family, without whose support we could not have taken on
this case, to SPUC and to our very talented legal team whose expertise
and support we could not have done without. Thank you to each and
everyone.”

Born alive after abortions part 5: Incident at A Gyn Diagnostics Center

By Sarah TerzoA Gyn Diagnostics Center, an abortion clinic in Hialeah, Florida, has a slick and professional-looking website. The site features a picture of a thoughtful- and earnest-looking woman and tells prospective patients that:

The professionals at A Gyn Diagnostics
Center are experienced in the areas of women’s health, abortion
services, and family planning issues. We are sensitive to the personal
issues surrounding birth control and unplanned pregnancy. … From a free
pregnancy test to abortion procedures performed by board certified
physicians, we will offer excellent care, privacy, confidentiality and
compassion.

There is nothing to indicate the grisly events that happened at the clinic in July of 2006 [www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,488644,00.html].
On July 20 of 2006, an 18-year-old woman named Sycloria Williams arrived for a routine abortion in the 22nd-23rd week
of her pregnancy. In 2006, late-second-trimester abortions were legal
everywhere in the country, and they are still legal in all but a few
states.
Williams had paid her $1,200 and was prepared for her abortion. She
was given two pills to dilate her cervix and instructed to wait for her
abortionist, Pierre Renelique, to arrive. The abortionist, however, was
running late. Williams sat for hours, in increasing pain. She ended up
delivering a living, breathing premature baby.

As the newborn baby girl, who had black hair and brown eyes and
weighed approximately 1 to 2 pounds, lay on the floor kicking amid the
ensuing commotion, one of the owners of the clinic, Belkis Gonzalez,
picked her up and threw her into a red plastic biohazard bag, where she
eventually died, according to the lawsuit, as reported by Fox News.
This would have been the end of the story, and no one would ever have known about what happened –except that an anonymous call was made to the police. Police believe that the call was made by another clinic worker, but this has never been determined.

Perhaps witnessing the delivery and murder of a living, breathing
child was too much for one of the abortion workers to bear, and she
could not allow the incident to be swept under the rug. Police searched
the clinic but did not find the aborted baby. It was later determined
that the child, still in the bag, was hidden by being thrown onto the
clinic’s roof. After two more calls from the anonymous informer and
another search warrant, the police found the body of the child stuffed into a cardboard box.
According to Hialeah Detective Tony Rodriguez [www.aproundtable.org/news.cfm?NEWS_ID=1393&issuecode=life], the lead investigator, “[i]n 24 years in law enforcement, I have never seen a case like this.”
Joanne Sterner, president of the Broward County chapter of the National Organization for Women,commented on the case,
saying, “It really disturbed me. I know that there are clinics out
there like this. And I hope that we can keep [women] from going to these
types of clinics.” One wonders why, if the National Organization for
Women is aware there are terrible abortion clinics, its leadership do
not take steps to improve them or shut them down.

The autopsy report verifies
that the baby was born alive and breathing, as air was found in her
lungs. The original autopsy report identified the cause of death as
“extreme prematurity,” but the act of placing the still breathing baby
into a plastic bag would have ensured her death. Pro-life groupsput pressure on law enforcement to
press charges against the clinic. Initially, charges against Gonzalez
were filed – not for murder, but for evidence-tampering and the
unlicensed practice of medicine. However, even these charges were soon
dropped.

Prosecutors argued that the unborn baby was too young to have
survived. Viability is generally considered to be 24 weeks, but younger
babies have survived. The little girl, who was named Shaunice by her
mother but who was identified only as “Baby Girl Williams” in the
autopsy forms, weighed between one and two pounds when she was born.
Indian baby Rumaisa Rahman survived after being born weighing only 8 ounces. Maddalena Douse was born at 23 weeks and weighed less than a pound. She survived and is a healthy baby today.

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Family of Chen Guangcheng receives death threats, house pelted with stones and bricks

LINYI, Shandong, China, April 26, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com)
- In apparent retaliation for the testimony of blind human rights
advocate Chen Guangcheng at a U.S. Congressional hearing two weeks ago,
authorities in his home province of Shandong have begun terrorizing two
of his brothers and a sister-in-law.

Chen Guangcheng spent more than four years in prison in China for exposing the brutal methods that China uses to enforce its one-child policy. He made a daring escape
from house arrest last April, before seeking shelter in the U.S.
embassy, and eventually making his way to safety in the United States
with his wife and children.

Chen Guangcheng with his wife after arriving in the United States.

However, he has continued to express fears that his relatives and
supporters still remaining in China will be subject to reprisals,
despite promises from the Chinese government that they will be
unmolested. Now it appears that those fears are being realized.
According to reports, this past Sunday (April 21), at about 1 a.m., a
hail of stones, bricks and roof tiles rained down on the home of Chen
Guangfu, Chen Guangcheng's eldest brother. The assault continued for
about a half-hour, resulting in damage to his house. A dead duck and a
stack of paper money used as burnt offerings for the dead were also
placed outside the front gate. According to local custom, this is meant
to be a death threat. Chen Guangfu has reported the incident to the
police, but with no result to date.

The human rights group ChinaAid says it has also learned that "small
character posters" started showing up around the village last Friday
(April 19) that were full of insulting attacks on Chen Guangcheng and
Chen Guangfu. On Monday (April 22), 20 saplings that Chen Guangfu had
planted were uprooted. Wednesday (April 24) at 2:31 a.m., Chen
Guangfu's home was again attacked with stones and beer bottles.
Later Wednesday afternoon, Chen Guangfu's wife, Ren Zongju, was taken
to the local police station for questioning, and was allowed to return
home at about 4:30 p.m. She was told that her "harboring a criminal"
case had entered the investigation and prosecution stage and that she
could hire a lawyer.
The charge of "harboring a criminal" is related to an incident
involving Ren’s son, Chen Kegui, who defended himself with a kitchen
knife last April when a group of officials burst into his house in the
middle of the night looking for Chen Guangcheng after his escape.

According to Chen Guangcheng, these officials did not sustain any major injuries. According to Chen Guangcheng,
they subjected his nephew and sister-in-law to a vicious beating, and
ransacked their home. Kegui was subsequently charged with attempted
murder. He was later convicted of “intentional injury” and sentenced to
three years and three months in prison.
Also on Wednesday, Chen Guangcheng's younger brother, Chen Guangjun,
who was working in Linyi, reportedly received a call from the
procuratorate's office, telling him to report to the Yinan County
Procuratorate, which he did, but since it was already 6 p.m. when he
arrived, the Procutorate was closed for the day.

"These shocking developments are nothing but political retaliation for
Chen Guangcheng's escape to freedom last year," said ChinaAid founder
and president Bob Fu. "These horrific threats clearly bear the hallmark
of the Chinese government that orchestrated the persecution against
Chen and his family members over the past seven years."

"The Chinese government is totally disregarding the high-level
U.S.-China diplomatic agreement reached last May before Mr. Chen and his
family were allowed to come to the United States. It is time for
President Obama and Secretary Kerry to hold the Chinese top leaders
account," Fu said.
This recent escalation followed Chen's Congressional testimony two
weeks ago, during which he charged the Chinese authorities with
violating the promise made to U.S. negotiators that Chen's extended
family would not be harmed once Chen, his wife and their two children
had left for the United States.

“We condemn the persecution of the relatives of Chen Guangcheng by
Chinese Communist thugs,” said Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s
Rights Without Frontiers, a human rights group that worked for years to
secure the safety of Chen Guangcheng.
“This harassment is clearly designed to silence him as one of the
leading voices in the world to expose the brutality of this regime,” she
said. “We urge Chinese President Xi Jinping to stop the harassment of
Chen Guangcheng’s relatives in Dongshigu Village. We call upon President
Obama and Secretary Kerry to urgently intervene on behalf of Chen
Guangcheng’s relatives in China.”
Earlier this week, Littlejohn, along with Rep. Chris Smith, attempted to deliver 200,000 signatures
on a petition demanding that China end forced abortions and gendercide
to the Chinese embassy in Washington. However, despite repeated attempts
to gain access to the embassy, they were unsuccessful, with embassy
officials ignoring their ringing at the door.